Umum tahu betapa mahalnya nilai hartanah di negeri Selangor sejak kebalakangan ini hinggakan rumah yang sepatutnya mampu milik kini hampir menjadi rumah mampu tengok.
Pengarah Komunikasi Pejabat Menteri Besar Selangor Yin Shao Loong telah sedaya upaya cuba untuk menyalahkan kerajaan Persekutuan pimpinan Barisan Nasional dengan mengatakan kadar cukai hartanah ditetapkan oleh Kementerian Kewangan dan bukannya oleh kerajaan negeri.
Apabila disemak laman web Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan di Selangor, ini pula yang ditemui.
Laman Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya dengan terang-terang menamakan kerajaan negeri Selangor sebagai entiti yang menetapkan kadar peratusan cukai hartanah.
Ini disahkan oleh Kementerian Kewangan yang menyatakan bahawa apa jua permasalahan berkenaan hartanah adalah di bawah tanggungjawab kerajaan negeri dan bukannya kerajaan Persekutuan.
Yin Shao Loong cuba pula untuk membohongi rakyat dengan menyalahkan Barisan Nasional berkenaan kadar cukai hartanah yang mahal.
Namun, apabila ditunjukkan bukti berikut mengenai kenaikan kadar cukai di negeri Selangor, beliau terus mendiamkan diri.
Kesian orang Selangor. Undilah lagi parti mata Dajjal tu nanti.
Second Finance Minister, Johari Ghani today revealed that both Jho Low and Riza Aziz have never paid taxes in Malaysia.
Replying to DAP’s Lim Lip Eng in Parliament, Johari said the duo has never declared their income in Malaysia and this the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) cannot tax them.
Opposition supporters jumped with joy upon hearing this, with some asking how can they not be taxed when they throw wild parties frequently. As usual, Opposition supporters know very little about anything else than to whine about everything.
If the duo have a business in Malaysia and earn their income in Malaysia, the IRB would definitely have jumped on them.
Unfortunately, this is not the case as the duo earn their income overseas.
If the Opposition supporters use the Internet to Google for the correct information rather than spending their life reading trash in portals like Sarawak Report, they would have come across this in the IRB’s website:
“Mulai tahun taksiran 2004, pendapatan yang diterima di Malaysia dari luar Malaysia adalah dikecualikan daripada cukai. Dengan itu, pembayar cukai sama ada yang bermastautin atau yang tidak bermastautin di Malaysia dikenakan cukai atas pendapatan yang diperoleh dari Malaysia sahaja.”
And Lim Sian See adds:
Why Jho Low and Riza Aziz do not pay tax in Malaysia?
They are not in the country 182 days or more per year and do not earn their income here.
Therefore, they are not considered as TAX RESIDENT in Malaysia and hence do not pay tax here.
Presumably, they will pay tax in the countries where their jobs are or spend most of the time in.
Tax accountants will understand this.
Please ask Lim Guan Eng if he understands the concept of tax residency or not.
Second Finance Minister has also issued a statement as follows:
1. I wish to clarify further to my reply to the Segambut MP, YB Lim Lip Eng and Batu MP, YB Tian Chua who recently asked me about the tax file(s) of a Mr. Reza Aziz and Mr. Jho Low and why these two individuals are not paying tax in Malaysia.
2. The tax collection system in Malaysia is based on the simple premise that if an individual or company derives income from Malaysia, that income received will be subjected to Malaysian income tax. While income derived from outside Malaysia and remitted to Malaysia will be exempted from tax. This applies to all individuals or companies without any exceptions. It is important for LHDNM to determine whether the income is derived from Malaysia before income of an individual or a company is subject to Malaysian tax.
3. The initial finding of LHDNM has shown that the two individuals, who were the subject of enquiries by the Opposition MPs in Parliament, do not have income derived from Malaysia in the past recent years and there are no records that they have brought in taxable income derived from overseas into Malaysia. Even if they had brought their income which is derived from overseas into Malaysia, this will be exempt from income tax. However if it is later discovered that any of their income is indeed subject to Malaysian tax, LHDNM has the power to raise assessment against those individuals within 5 years or at any time if fraud, wilful default or negligence is proven.
4. Malaysia has adopted a self-assessment system, where an individual or a company is required to determine and compute their chargeable income and tax liability. The rate of tax applicable is provided under the Income Tax Act 1967 and changes to the rate may be made and announced during the Annual National Budget. Under the self-assessment system a taxpayer will be audited on any declaration of income made. In the case where a person fails to make any declaration, LHDNM has a dedicated team to continuously analyse and identify this and severe penalties will be imposed once LHDNM has ascertained that tax is payable. It is not the practice of LHDNM to tax any individuals or companies based on perceived wealth or rumours of income.
5. Please be assured that LHDNM is ever vigilant in carrying out its duties under the law without fear or favour.
“Ada tiga tanda orang munafik, iaitu apabila dia bercakap dia berbohong, apabila berjanji dia ingkar dan apabila diberi amanah dia khianat.” (Riwayat al-Bukhari dan Muslim).
Enam tahun yang lepas, semasa kita semua sibuk membuat persiapan untuk menghadapi Pilihanraya Umum Ke-13, Pakatan Rakyat yang kini terkubur telah berjanji untuk menghapuskan PTPTN.
Hari ini, Pakatan Harapan sekali lagi tampil memberi harapan palsu kepada anak-anak muda.
Kalau dulu Pakatan Rakyat berjanji untuk memansuhkan PTPTN, kali ini Pakatan Harapan yang dikepalai oleh satu fossil hidup berumur 93 tahun yang kerap menjadi perabut Institut Jantung Negara bila ceramahnya tidak mendapat sambutan, mengubah janji tersebut dari pemansuhan kepada penangguhan pembayaran.
Jadi, adik-adik, sekali lagi anda tertipu kerana setiap janji yang dibuat oleh Pakatan tidak akan ditunaikan. Malah, mereka lebih gemar membuat U-turn demi U-turn.
Contoh pertama ialah janji untuk memansuhkan PTPTN pada PRU Ke-13 kini digantikan dengan penangguhan pembayaran PTPTN sebagai janji untuk PRU Ke-14.
Semasa membuat Bajet 2018, Pakatan berjanji akan memberi cuti bersalin selama 120 hari sebagai bukti ianya memartabatkan kaum wanita, manakala BN hanya memberi selama 90 hari.
Dalam janji Pakatan untuk PRU Ke-14, jumlah yang dijanjikan telahpun dikuramgkan ke 90 hari, iaitu sesuatu yang telah dilaksanakan oleh kerajaan BN di bawah Najib Razak. Siapa kini yang tidak memartabatkan kaum wanita PADA HARI WANITA SEDUNIA?
Nampaknya, benarlah seperti apa yang disuarakan oleh Kepala Pakatan yang masih tamakkan kuasa dan tidak akan memberikan kuasa kepada golongan muda:
Dan apa sabda Rasulullah SAW di atas mengenai orang yang tidak menunaikan janji?
Munafik! Inikah golongan yang anda ingin jadikan pemimpin?
I refer to a WhatsApp message that says the following:
“Listen to this (video) and think about it.
It’s hard to believe that Malaysia is the perfect model for China after Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Jamaica & Greece.
We hv the history of atrocities by Communist Party (Terrorists).
Jack Ma is also the influential biz advisor to the PM.
Numerous lands & companies bought over by China, Xiamen university for students from China.
Enclavement (safe haven) in MCKIP, Forest Cities, flourishing China’s retail companies even in Aeon too.etc,
Strategic Tun Razak 106 Exchange overlooking KL area, with potential airport, ports and MISC shipping, railway lines, even purchase of Perwaja land within Kemaman Supply base etc….widespread corruptions, a condusive environment to China Belt Road Initiatives.
We hv to accept first that the threat is real.”
HISTORY OF ATROCITIES BY COMMUNIST PARTY
The atrocity done to Malaysians was by those born in Malaya, not China. China merely gave its support for the setting up of a Communist satellite nation in Malaysia by Chin Peng, who is largely revered by the DAP.
In 1981, Mahathir’s political secretary was arrested by the police for being a communist agent. Interestingly, Mahathir allowed Communist Cuba to open an embassy in Kuala Lumpur in 1997. Mahathir also allowed Communist North Korea to open an embassy in Kuala Lumpur in 2003, several months before he stepped down.
Mahathir loved Communist China so much that he visited the country seven times and invited China to invest in Malaysia. A year after he became PM the Sino-Malaysia trade stood at US$307 million. A year before he stepped down, it was at US$14 billion.
Mahathir himself said in Bangkok after retirement that for 2000 years China has been a superpower, and it could have invaded the Malay states had it wanted to but never did. So, if Mahathir has never been afraid of China, why should be we be afraid of it?
JACK MA IS INFLUENTIAL BUSINESS ADVISOR TO THE PM
Well, Jack Ma is the advisor to this country on E-Commerce. If this is the concern, then Jack Ma is also the business advisor to Indonesia on E-Commerce. By definition, China has also colonised Indonesia through Jack Ma.
Wait! Jack Ma is also the advisor to the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) on E-Commerce. So, has China taken over the world?
NUMEROUS LANDS AND COMPANIES BOUGHT OVER BY CHINA. XIAMEN UNIVERSITY FOR STUDENTS FROM CHINA
Wow! Well written by a very ill-informed person.
Xiamen University Campus Malaysia has 700 students from China and 900 from Malaysia. Last year it gave out scholarships to top performing local (Malaysian students).
Xiamen University Campus Malaysia is just a new face in a crowded space that already has nine branch campus of foreign universities that include Nottingham University, University of Reading, Monash University to name a few.
Why pick on Xiamen University alone? Is it because it is in a state held by the Barisan Nasional? Before Xiamen University, we already have Hanjiang (Han Chiang) University in Pulau Pinang and New Era University College in Kajang, Selangor. Why not ask why is the flag of China flying above those campuses as well?
As at the beginning of 2018, China’s investments received in Malaysia is RM63 billion. Japan’s investments received in Malaysia totals RM70 billion. Aren’t we selling the country to the Japanese more?
Furthermore, China’s FDI in Malaysia is at the 10th place and accounts for only 2 percent of the total FDI received by Malaysia. The US debt to China is at US$1.2 TRILLION making its Debt-to-China-versus-GDP at 6.5 percent. Is the US now owned by China? You tell me!
ENCLAVEMENT IN MCKIP, FOREST CITY, FLOURISHING CHINA’S RETAIL COMPANIES IN AEON TOO
AEON is a company that has nine members of the Board. Three of the nine are Japanese while the rest are Malaysians. If the Japanese board members don’t give a hoot about China retail companies in AEON complexes, why should you?
The Malaysia-China Kuantan Industrial Park (MCKIP) in Kuantan is a 51:49 percent joint-venture between a Malaysian consortium and a China consortium. How is it that we have sold our country to China when we have a 51-percent control of the park?
Why did the writer also write that there is a CMQIP in China? Yes, there is a China-Malaysia Qinzhou Industrial Park which is also a 51:49 percent joint-venture between a China consortium and a Malaysian consortium. Has China also sold its ports, airports and country to Malaysia?
There are also the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park (CSSIP) and the China-Singapore Tianjin Eco City (CSTEC), both in China. Has China sold its country to Singapore too?
Exchange 106 is only built by China’s CSCEC, but the master developer is Indonesia’s Mulia Group. Since when is Exchange 106 a China-owned property?
Forest City is an exception. Although only 40 percent of the development is owned by a Malaysian company, it is an enclave for foreigners, not just China’s citizens. About 15 percent is owned by other foreigners including those from the Indian subcontinent and the Middle East. But does owning only 40 percent make Forest City essentially China-owned?
Similarly, the Marina One and DUO development in Singapore are 60 percent owned by Khazanah Nasional. 40 percent remains with Temasek Holdings. Does that mean those developments are essentially Malaysian? Has Singapore sold itself to Malaysia? Has there been any noise by anyone in Singapore over this issue?
Of course not. Singaporeans are not as stupid and foolish as Malaysians are who would believe anything especially lies and fake news.
Kuala Yong near Jeli, Kelantan is a laid back but picturesque place. Located some 100 kilometres west of Kota Bharu, the village was once the seat of a global controversy that is still being spoken about today – the Pergau Dam affair.
The Pergau Dam affair was about treachery – Mahathir’s style.
It involved an arms scandal as well as aid for the poor that turned into what is now the Pergau Dam.
Allegations of bribes being passed to the then-Prime Minister of Malaysia was abound. But as with the allegations of tens of billions of Ringgits squandered by Mahathir, he never challenged these allegations either.
The Pergau Dam story started with then Secretary of State for Defense George Younger’s agreement with the government of Malaysia in 1988 that the Britain would provide aid in the amount of 20 percent the value of arms sales from Britain to Malaysia. This aid would come in the form of a dam project, despite a subsequent assessment from economists and engineers of the Overseas Development Administration (ODA – the UK’s development arm at the time, which reported to the Foreign Secretary) who found that the dam would not be a cost-efficient way to increase the production of electricity.
In 1991, then Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, authorised the expenditure of £234 million from the aid budget anyway, to maintain a deal made by the defence secretary and approved by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and later John Major. The World Development Movement called for a judicial review of the funding of Pergau Dam on the grounds of a law which states that aid can only be used for “promoting the development or maintaining the economy of a country….or the welfare of its people”.
The British High Court ruled in 1994 that the project was not of economic benefit to the Malaysian people; the deal linked aid directly to commercial contracts and was unlawful.
The Sunday Times ran a story that the dam contractor, George Wimpey International, had paid an initial bribe meant for Mahathir to the tune of USD500,000 (approximately RM1.25 million then). Instead of challenging the newspaper in a court of law, Mahathir got Anwar, who was his Deputy then, to announce ‘Buy British Last II‘.
Lim Kit Siang, Mahathir’s present best friend, jumped at the opportunity to slam the latter. He openly challenged Mahathir to sue the Sunday Times in a court of law – something Mahathir never did.
Although the amount of bribe stated by Lim Kit Siang varied from what was reported by the Sunday Times the last two lines of the above screen capture of Kit Siang’s article shows that monies were transferred to ‘account numbers in Switzerland to which fees related to contract award are to be paid.‘
When the Pergau deal and alleged bribes transfers took place in 1984-85, Mahathir’s right-hand man Daim Zainuddin was the Finance Minister. Coincidentally, it was said that Daim owned, or was in control of, at least a bank in Switzerland, if not more. This was also how, according to Edmund Terence Gomez and Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Daim’s company called Baktimu Sdn Bhd was able to obtain a RM40 million loan from the Union Bank of Switzerland to buy a 33 percent stake in Sime UEP for RM75 million in CASH!
Daim only recently divested from the banking business in Switzerland through his company, ICB Financial Group AG.
Could Daim have been involved in providing the accounts into which these payments were credited?
Neither Mahathir nor Daim has come forth to explain, let alone sue especially the Sunday Times for running that story.
In the words of Lim Kit Siang when his struggle then was for the people:
I refer to a recent post on the left-leaning portal The Malaysian Insight where Ng Kheng Khoon, a researcher from the National University of Singapore, wrote that Forest City has disrupted the local housing market and appeared to be exempt from compliance with Johor’s housing policies.
Keng Khoon who along with Nanyang Technical University’s Guanie Lim said that there is no data to show that the Forest City development has directly contributed to the provision of affordable and low-cost homes in Johor Baru, and nor is there a provision of the Bumiputra quota in this project as it falls under the category of ‘newly established international zone’.
Keng Khoon added that was not in line with the Johor Housing Policy for Johoreans in Iskandar Malaysia (DPRJ) introduced in 2014.
The policy was actually introduced in 2012, not 2014.
The Malaysian Insight wrote that according to data compiled at the National Property Information Centre, homes in the RM250,000-RM500,000 range were most launched in Johor Baru, making up about 40% of total launches.
The price range is the yardstick for affordability for the majority of Johoreans.
At a PropertyGuru Malaysia Property Show (MPS) in Singapore, over 2,155 Singaporean buyers flocked to hunt for properties. At the end of the event, over 30 units worth RM30.1 million were sold. Two weeks later, 20 units worth RM18.3 million were also sold at the MPS in Johor Bahru.
Wealthier foreigners, majority of whom are Singaporeans have also snapped high-value properties in Johor, causing land price to shoot up. Some Johor-based property valuers said the land price in Ledang Heights, located in the Iskandar region had increased fivefold since 2007 to between RM150 and RM250 per square foot (psf) in 2017.
Both Ng Kheng Khoon and Guanie Lim have answered most of the issues they have raised themselves. Firstly, Forest City is a development that has been designated as an ‘International Zone’.
In an interview by this blog writer in September 2017, Country Garden Pacificview (CGPV) executive director Datuk Md Othman Yusof said that Forest City is aimed at foreign buyers, not Malaysians. This is to ensure that foreigners take up only what is being sold at Forest City, leaving the development on mainland Johor up for grabs by the locals.
“This is how Johor ensures that the local market is not spoilt,” he added.
Therefore, it is evident that by designating Forest City as an International Zone, the Johor state government as well as CGPV are doing the locals a favour. If Forest City has to build affordable or low-cost housing in that development area, it would contradict the international zone status.
For the same purpose, Dubai designates similar zones for foreigners to own properties in. Article 4 of the Property Ownership Law. Article 4 of the Property Ownership Law allows non-UAE or GCC nationals and companies to own freehold title in the areas in Dubai that have been designated for foreign ownership under regulations issued by the Ruler of Dubai (‘Designated Areas’).
Imagine if Forest City has to build low-cost homes, local contractors would have to fold up. How are local contractors to compete with Forest City’s Industrialised Building System (IBS) which can pre-frabicate house components in far shorter time than local contractors could?
“One of the project’s major selling points is its connectivity to neighbouring Singapore. This means that a new Customs, Immigration, and Quarantine Complex (CIQ) dedicated to Forest City will have to be established. But who will pay for the upkeep of this third CIQ that only serves private interests?” said Keng Khoon to The Malaysian Insight.
If this is the best that a researcher from the University that is 15th in the world according to the 2018 Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings could put forth as an argument, that raises a question on how the NUS could get that ranking.
If Forest City could afford an IBS plant, surely it can build and maintain a CIQ for its purpose, operated by the various related government agencies. Having a CIQ there is a matter of government policy. Imagine the number of Singaporeans being able to go to Tuas on a busy weekend, and travel by boat to Forest City to shop at its Duty Free Zone, and stay at their apartment there.
Or even live there and work in Singapore.
Or even live and conduct their business from Forest City.
Is that why until now Mediacorp has not allowed any form of advertisement involving properties in Johor to be aired on any of their channels?
Secondly, the Johor Housing Policy for Johoreans affect only the properties built on mainland Johor. Forest City is NOT built on a part of mainland Johor. Nor is Forest City built for locals (unless they have money to spare to purchase properties there).
However, the locals can go there to shop, enjoy the facilities, and even work there! As of January 2018, 1100 out of 1500 workers in Forest City are locals. That accounts for 73 percent of the workforce there, debunking the myth created by the Opposition that Forest City does not provide employment opportunities for locals.
To summarise, Forest City is an initiative to provide properties to wealthier foreigners to own so that the local market is not spoilt and remain affordable for locals to own. Therefore, its creation does not go against the Johor Housing Policy for Johoreans. Far from not being beneficial for the locals, it gives employment to the locals and is expected to create more jobs for locals as its development progresses.
When Israeli diplomat David Roet attended a United Nations conference in Kuala Lumpur recently, the Opposition went into full swing trying to discredit the government saying that it wants to establish diplomatic relations with Israel.
In a statement, the Malaysian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) explicitly states that the invitations to the Israeli delegates was issued by the UN as per Article III of the Host Country Agreement signed by the organisation and Malaysia so that the UN is able to conduct its conferences away from any of its established headquarters.
The Article states, in part, that the Forum shall be opened to all UN member states and its Specialised Agencies. This was confirmed by Israel’s Hadashot TV which reported that Malaysia was compelled to host the Israelis, since it was required to grant visas to all delegations in order to hold the international conference. Therefore, it is immaterial whether or not Malaysia has diplomatic relations with Israel. It is for the same reason that Fidel Castro was able to attend the UN summit in New York in 1976, 1995 and 2000.
If you walk along Jalan Zainal Abidin in Pulau Pinang which is just off Burmah Road near the Tune Hotel, you will come across an old cemetery. That is a Jewish Cemetery. Jalan Zainal Abidin was once called Jalan Yahudi or Jew Street, the only evidence that a Jewish enclave once existed on the island.
Israel first established contact with our pre-independence government in 1956 when Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharett visited Malaya to propose the appointment of an Israeli consul in Malaya. Israel also voted in favour of the Malayan bid to become a UN member in 1957. Trade between the two countries was in place. This was banned in 1974, after the Yom Kippur war, but indirect trade (through third countries) was in place.
An Opposition supporter was quick to point out that according to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, between 2008 and 2011 trade between the two countries fluctuated considerably. Israel’s exports to Malaysia peaked at USD798 million in 2010 while imports from Malaysia peaked in 2011 at USD93.6 million.
Although the preriod shown above shows the statistics was for the period between the end of Abdullah Badawi’s administration and the commencement of the Najib Razak administration, the flourish in trade could be traced back to the Mahathir administration. In December 1993, as a consequence of the Oslo I Accord, Mahathir wrote a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.
The photo of the letter may be a bit difficult to read but I shall provide the transcript here:
PRIME MINISTER, MALAYSIA
21 December 1993
His Excellency Mr Yitzhak Rabin Prime Minister of Israel, JERUSALEM
I would like to thank you for your letter of 17 October informing me about the Agreement of Principles and Mutual Recognition between Israel and the PLO.
My government supports this positive development and views it as a first step towards the realization of a comprehensive solution to the Middle East problem. As a demonstration of Malaysia’s support to this development my country was represented at the Donor’s Conference to support The Middle East Peace held in Washington and subsequently pledged a modest financial contribution to the Palestinians to assist in their new tasks. My government has also offered the Palestinians technical assistance under the Malaysian Technical Cooperation Programme.
Malaysia as a matter of general principle is prepared to develop relations with Israel at the appropriate time. In the meantime, we would like to see tangible progress in the implementation of the peace agreement.
The Middle East problem particularly the Palestinian issue has been a cause of instability to the region and I hope the recent agreement between Israel and PLO would contribute to lasting peace to the area.
I look forward to normal relations with Israel.
DR. MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
I intentionally made bold the last line because, while the rest of the content which, obviously was drafted by someone else, Mahathir wrote that bold part saying he looked forward to normal relations with Israel himself. Yes, it was handwritten.
In the most recent diplomatic history, Obama wished to have normal relations with Cuba. Diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba was subsequently restored. The following year, PKR’s Chua Jui Meng, who was the then-Deputy Minister of International Trade and Industry, suggested that Israel could eventually become a destination for Malaysia’s investments (Shanti Nair, Routledge, 1997 p.252).
As a result, in 1999 Israeli exports to Malaysia totalled USD107 million. In 2000, it was USD732 million, and USD615.5 million the following year. In 2002, the Israel Ministry of Industry report on trade relations with Indonesia and Malaysia advised Israelis interested in conducting business with Malaysian companies that “there is no opposition to trade and commerce relations as long as a low profile is kept“.
Discretion is essential for these companies, not just in Malaysia but also in Indonesia. Reputation and financial damage are the risks for companies in these two countries if they are known to be doing trade with Israel. According to Emanuel Shahaf, the vice chairman of the Israel-Indonesia Chamber of Commerce, “There are two contradictory trends. The pro trend is that Indonesia demands more high-tech things… The negative trend is the political situation is not getting better (when it comes to Israel), in fact it’s getting worse.”
Mukhriz tweeted “Upon request from large foreign investors here, in 1996 the Cabinet instructed MITI to approve import from and export to Israel.” The relevation came as a surprise, especially as the trade ties were established during the Mahathir administration. Mahathir has been a vocal opponent of Israel and continues to project this false stand via his Perdana Leadership Foundation which openly opposes Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. Najib took over from Abdullah only in 2009.
So, thank you Mahathir for his eagerness to start a diplomatic relationship with Israel in 1993.
Congratulations also to the Opposition states as they received a lot of FDI from Israeli companies. Don’t forget to thank Mukhriz for that information and confirmation.